What do you mean? Didn't you read the part where I said that I've used an Athlon as my main computer for the past 3 years, and it just does not satisfy me? In fact, it cost me a lot of time and money. Will any of you AMD-zealots repay me this? After all, you AMD-zealots were the ones who convinced me to buy AMD in the first place. Since you misadvised me, you should draw your consequences, really.
Brand Loyalty
- Thread starter Scott_Arm
- Start date
What do you mean? Didn't you read the part where I said that I've used an Athlon as my main computer for the past 3 years, and it just does not satisfy me? In fact, it cost me a lot of time and money. Will any of you AMD-zealots repay me this? After all, you AMD-zealots were the ones who convinced me to buy AMD in the first place. Since you misadvised me, you should draw your consequences, really.
Intel has rolled out broken products before, like the original Pentium, and recently the 9xx chipsets. The difference is that Intel recalls these products and replaces them free of charge. When my VIA chipset was bugged, or my Athlon was overheating, all I got to hear was "It's supposed to do that, what do you expect for that amount of money?".
I cannot afford these problems, once was once too many.
I need that guarantee that Intel gives me. Or someone who will give me that guarantee for an AMD system, as I said before. AMD/VIA/whatever other chipset aren't going to give me it. As I say, if you want me to use an AMD system, give me one that works, and a backup Intel system just in case. I am not taking the risk again. But I guess none of you AMD zealots like AMD so much that you are going to do that for me.
In which case, I suggest you check your zealotry at the door, because I don't want to hear it. Either deliver me a working AMD system, or leave me alone. I am not interested in *your* system, *your* system is not the one I will be working on everyday. I need to work on *my* system, and *my* system cannot fail.
Perhaps you didn't pick up the part where I explained that 3d rendering and movie encoding are the most important things for me, and this is where the Athlon is weak. And this is where you need SSE/SSE2 performance, and memory bandwidth is not really helping there.
So I don't care about some benchmark figures of tasks/software (linux? get real) that don't have any relation to the things I use my PC for.
You guys seem bent on converting me to AMD (even though I actually use AMD). I just tell you how to do it. I didn't say you have to pay for it. But I will only buy it if I can test-drive it first. If it fails me, I won't pay for it, and I do need a backup system when it fails me.
I on the other hand do not care what you use, and I don't feel obliged to show you how Intel products are not crappy. This is common knowledge anyway, and if you don't believe it, I don't care. Enjoy your AMD system. See the subtle difference?
Excuse me, but where exactly did I make 'blanket statements', and where exactly was I not speaking about myself?
I think it was very clear from the start that I spoke about MY experiences with AMD, and why I found them lacking, and why I would buy Intel? (heck, the entire topic is about that. "Why do *YOU* choose a certain brand?" That's the topic. Not "Why does Chalnoth think everyone should buy *his* favourite brand".) I don't bother telling other people what to buy, unless they ask me for advice. I hate it when people try to force their opinion on me, so I don't do that.
Not very nice of you to go and make personal attacks at me like this. For what? For not sharing your love for AMD? Grow up, and learn some manners.
That's what you get with zealots who want to force their opinion on everyone, I suppose. It's like that with AMD-guys, linux-guys, and ironically with NVIDIA and ATi guys... AMD and linux are at least the underdog, but with 3d cards, anything goes, it seems.
I've never seen anyone trying to force Windows or Intel on people anyway. Why should they? Most people already use that, and the ones that don't, probably have their reasons to not have taken the obvious choice, so just let them.
I mean, if you read back the thread, you'll see me commenting on my preference for Intel... Someone asks why, I explain that I had problems, and don't want them again, I also state that I don't want to discuss it any further, even if other people have Athlons that work fine for them... and what do you get? People constantly bothering you about "But you must have done something wrong, and you must be an idiot, and AMD is much better, blahblahblah". I knew this was going to happen, it always does. Which is why I said I didn't want to be bothered. But that's zealots for you.
They quite nicely derailed this complete thread. And what have they achieved? I'm most certainly not convinced to buy an AMD now.
I've never seen anyone trying to force Windows or Intel on people anyway. Why should they? Most people already use that, and the ones that don't, probably have their reasons to not have taken the obvious choice, so just let them.
I mean, if you read back the thread, you'll see me commenting on my preference for Intel... Someone asks why, I explain that I had problems, and don't want them again, I also state that I don't want to discuss it any further, even if other people have Athlons that work fine for them... and what do you get? People constantly bothering you about "But you must have done something wrong, and you must be an idiot, and AMD is much better, blahblahblah". I knew this was going to happen, it always does. Which is why I said I didn't want to be bothered. But that's zealots for you.
They quite nicely derailed this complete thread. And what have they achieved? I'm most certainly not convinced to buy an AMD now.
Re: Neat
Yup.
Scott_Arm said:
Yup.
Yet people do try to convert others to intel still. They use arguments like Scali presented to show that the 1400 Mhz thundebird was unstable and thus the opteron is not a valid choice for a workstation. That is the reason people try to convince you that AMD is no longer piss poor. Heck there was a time when I thought ATI was piss poor after geting a rage128 and it took until the 9500 to buy another ATI card, but I am sure glad I did so.
People can actually tell horror stories about intel systems too btw But I tend to agree that if you buy a motherboard with intel chipset you are going to get a fairly stable machine.
In any case feel free to spend your money how you see fit. I couldn't care less about it other than the uncontrolable urge to tell someone that they might as well be throwing it out the window or giving the amount they save by buying cheaper parts to charity or something Although in honesty I believe most people are motivated by altruistic reasons (gee I guess I aint that cynical) and they are trying to help someone save money. That is the reason I told everyone who asked me not to get a nv3x card and get an r3xx instead b/c I wanted them to not waste money on a card that is less than stellar.
Oh and btw I think the quality of ATI cards is deteriorating now that everyone and the uncle manufactures them. Perhaps that is a large part of why NV and ATI have more similar clarity and sharpness now. (there was even back in the day superb nv cards btw leadtek cards were super clear at least the ones I owned they looked as good as matrox cards.)
And fan loyalty has a positive effect b/c it makes people get slightly informed about things they would otherwise be clueless about at least I hope it does
People can actually tell horror stories about intel systems too btw
But I tend to agree that if you buy a motherboard with intel chipset you are going to get a fairly stable machine.In any case feel free to spend your money how you see fit. I couldn't care less about it other than the uncontrolable urge to tell someone that they might as well be throwing it out the window or giving the amount they save by buying cheaper parts to charity or something
Although in honesty I believe most people are motivated by altruistic reasons (gee I guess I aint that cynical) and they are trying to help someone save money. That is the reason I told everyone who asked me not to get a nv3x card and get an r3xx instead b/c I wanted them to not waste money on a card that is less than stellar.Oh and btw I think the quality of ATI cards is deteriorating now that everyone and the uncle manufactures them. Perhaps that is a large part of why NV and ATI have more similar clarity and sharpness now. (there was even back in the day superb nv cards btw leadtek cards were super clear at least the ones I owned they looked as good as matrox cards.)
And fan loyalty has a positive effect b/c it makes people get slightly informed about things they would otherwise be clueless about at least I hope it does
Here's the results of an intel/AMD poll at overclockers.com. I'd have to agree with Ed's conclusions, I'd be happy with either an intel or AMD processor, but IMHO intel still sets the bar when it comes to chipsets. I'm waiting on an SSF with the ICH6 for my next computer.
With video cards I tend to lean towards the ATi side. I think both companies manage to do amazing things with 1cm^2 slices of silicon, but #1 I was buying ATi cards long before nV ever existed (the EGA Wonder was a nice card) and #2 I'm from Toronto... I'd never (for example) not buy a laptop just because it had an nV GPU in it 'tho (assuming it did what I needed it to do).
Brand loyalty helps companies get through rough years.
With video cards I tend to lean towards the ATi side. I think both companies manage to do amazing things with 1cm^2 slices of silicon, but #1 I was buying ATi cards long before nV ever existed (the EGA Wonder was a nice card
) and #2 I'm from Toronto... I'd never (for example) not buy a laptop just because it had an nV GPU in it 'tho (assuming it did what I needed it to do).Brand loyalty helps companies get through rough years.
Scali said:
Well, that's not true for movie encoding anymore:
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2128&p=15
And these results on different types of encoding also shows that it's not a clear cut anymore. It depends a lot on the encoder that's used. It's f.e faster in WM9 which is HT optimized:
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/roundupmobo/athlon-64-3400.html
To be fair though, these results can differ a lot depending on the software that's used. But the difference is far from huge anymore like it used to be. And things are likely to be even better when 64 bit Windows and encoding starts to hit the market.
Some more tests:
Doing pretty well in 3D rendering (3Ds max):
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/prozessoren/amd_athlon_64_3500_3800/9/
Not that good in Cinema 4D and OK in Lightwave:
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/prozessoren/amd_athlon_64_3500_3800/10/
Some more WM9 encoding results, this time it's slower:
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/prozessoren/amd_athlon_64_3500_3800/8/
Scali said:
I don't see anyone trying to force their opinion on you. It's you who have made claims about f.e AMD's power usage on idle which is not true anymore. And people having a different opinion then you are not automatically Zealots trying to force their opinion on anyone. But i guess that it's a good thing to throw out when you are proven wrong.
Excuse me, but I still don't see the Athlons being faster, in most tests. And they still don't deliver in 3d rendering either. Not exactly a compelling reason to take a risk again. Now if they were considerably faster, it'd be another story.
Note also that these tests often render only a few frames, and a difference of a few seconds over a rendering time of 2 minutes seems to be 'close' for Athlons, but when you are rendering for hours and hours, the Athlons will be hours slower. And time is money.
Ofcourse you have to think practical, not benchmark.
By which time Intel will enable its 64 bit extensions aswell, and P4 performance is also likely going to be better, so we will have to re-evaluate then.
I made that claim about the Athlon XP, where it is still very much true, as the posted link to the Anandtech article showed. Athlon XPs still use more power when idle than a Prescott. Athlon64/Opteron may have mobile technology to cut it down, but you disqualified that yourself.
It wouldn't help me anyway, since my CPU is rarely idle.
Besides, as I said, the Intel cooling will work fine, so I don't care about temperature or power usage at all. And even if the cooling would fail, it would not crash. That is something that Athlons still can't do, afaik.
I never said that people with another opinion are automatically zealots. But you have to be honest and admit that the pro-AMD people here really derailed this thread in trying to convince me that AMD is better, and that my arguments were wrong etc.
My arguments were right, since they were mostly my own experiences. I also admitted from the start that there are better chipsets now, and better coolers. I just said that I didn't want to go through it all again, so I'd just get Intel to be safe.
Now, only a zealot would continue to argue then, if you ask me, because there's nothing to argue about. I already admitted that the situation has improved from the time when I bought my Athlon.
So go cry about it. I am not interested in Athlons because P4s deliver the best performance for me anyway, at this time, and Intel CPUs and chipsets are still the most reliable in general. And as you can see, I am not the only one who thinks that. There may be a chance that it's actually true! So just give up, I already told you the only way to convince me, so put your money where your mouth is, or shut up.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2026&p=3
Who is living in a fantasy world? Clearly the XP2500+/2600+ have by far the highest idle temperature. And those aren't even the highest models. I bet the faster XPs are even hotter. And since all CPUs in that test used the exact same heatsink, the heat has a direct relation to the power usage.
I am very much correct, and you are very much wrong. I hate people like you, who insist on something even when the link was posted before, and referred to it again in a previous post. And even worse, they go as far as making personal attacks based on this misinformation!
AMD currently holds the bang-for-buck throne for me, period.
I've had 4-5 intel systems from a pentium 60Mhz to a Celeron Tulatin 1.4 and I've had great experiences with all of them, but my lil NF7-s & Barton 2500+ is just an incredible little set-up for the pennies I spent on it!
I'm not evangelizing either, I'm just stating my personal experiences.
I've had 4-5 intel systems from a pentium 60Mhz to a Celeron Tulatin 1.4 and I've had great experiences with all of them, but my lil NF7-s & Barton 2500+ is just an incredible little set-up for the pennies I spent on it!
I'm not evangelizing either, I'm just stating my personal experiences.
Similar threads
